The 2016 Offseason Thread

[bwgood77]

Who cares if he hasnt post here much, hes trolling.
If hes allowed to put out these obnoxious "opinions" then he can handle himself just fine when the townsfolk come out.

He's not trolling which is specifically coming here to create havoc. He gave an opinion and everyone is free to argue that opinion or whatever. You just don't need to call someone a name for expressing an opinion or drastically overreact littering you post with a crapload of lol emoticons. It's annoying and while JMac1 tends to overreact often it's not necessary. It's time to let this go though and get back to Suns basketball.

[sunsbum]

Calling Booker a 4th option on a championship team is trolling. Theres no **** way around that one. Youre over moderating here dude. That is 100% troll bait.

[saintEscaton]

Booker is obviously the second coming of Ray Allen, he just needs do some BoingVert

[NavLDO]

You really going to try and use Kobe as an example? It was obvious Kobe was going to be fhujknmdfhbjdksnmgasjldfknabhlsjfn God I can't even finish my sarcastic response because it's so asinine....

Some former Suns to consider who were late bloomers:

Nash's numbers in his first 4 seasons: 21.7 minutes 43.8% FG 7.2 points 3.8 assists 1.9 rebounds 1.5 turnovers

Goran "I wish he was here!" Dragic after 3 seasons: 16.6 minutes 43.4% FG 6.8 points 2.7 assists 2.0 rebounds 1.5 turnovers

Marcin "Grown Ass Man, Best Suns Center" Gortat after 3 seasons: 12.8 minutes 54.5% FG 3.7 points 4.3 rebounds .8 blocks

From around the league:

Jimmy Butler after 3 seasons: 26.6 minutes 42.5% FG 8.9 points 1.6 assists 3.7 rebounds 1.1 steals .9 turnovers

Jeff "Better than our guards" Teague after 3 seasons: 18.7 minutes 45.1% FG 6.9 points 2.8 assists 1.6 rebounds 1.2 turnovers

Paul "We should trade for him now!" Millsap after 3 seasons: 22.8 minutes 52.3 FG% 9.4 points 6.4 rebounds .9 blocks

Now, let's look at our "busts":

Alex "Should've had Noel" Len after 3 seasons: 19.6 minutes 45.1% FG 6.5 points 6.1 rebounds 1.0 block

Archie "Miyagi's" Goodwin after 3 seasons: 14.5 minutes 41.9% FG 6.2 points 1.2 assists 2.0 rebounds 1.3 turnovers

EDIT: Realized everyone but Nash was 3 seasons so here are Nash's numbers after 3: 20.0 minutes 42.5% FG 6.7 points 3.4 assists 1.9 rebounds 1.3 turnovers

Bust, Bust, Bust...'we could've had Gobert!!!'

Gobert--198 FGs - 182, or 92% made at the rim. 14, or 7% made from 3-10ft

A. Len--264 FGs - 158, or 60% made at the rim. 42, or 16% made 16ft-3PT line

Gobert--60 starts / 61 Total gms / 32 MPG - 20 Dbl-Dbls

A. Len--46 starts / 78 Total gms / 23 MPG - 19 Dbl-Dbls

Gobert--Per36--10.4Pts / 12.4 TRB, FT%--.569

A. Len--Per36--13.9Pts /11.7 TRB, FT%--.728

Point being, is Gobert is darn good at what he does, but he hasn't been asked to stretch his range like Alex, so Gobert blows Alex away in FG%s, DRtg/ORtg, etc., but they are two completely different players, and I have no doubt that Len could put up equal Blks and[b] comparable DRtg/ORtg if he was only asked to do what is asked of Gobert...well, because he has earlier in his career[/b].

But it's only been 3 years, and he has over 800 less minutes than Gobert, so he's behind him in both age and experience; we'll learn a lot this season, about Len, and if he doesn't improve, well, then I guess we have no better than a 'marginal starter', but I honestly believe, if he stays healthy this season, he'll progress.

Nope this is patently false. Even when Len had his best stretch in January of 2014-2015, when you adjust for pace (Jazz are one of the slowest teams in the league per 100 possesions, Gobert had the clear edge in blocks,assists/rebounding and committed almost half the number of personal fouls Len did, he is a true anchor because he can stay home doesn't bite on everything and can alter shots even when he comes up empty. For that season Gobert absolutely destroys Len in DBPM, RPM and DFG% at the rim, where he was the league's best

And yet, he regressed this past season, and went back to the norm. So, because he did it for one season, that makes him better at it, overall?

Maybe he is, but like I've said--two different players serving two different roles. I was simply pointing out that when Len was in that role for limited periods throughout a game and/or season, he could do a lot of the same, but Len's never been asked to solely be that player that Gobert is. At MOST, Len made 68% of his shots at the rim; at the LEAST, Gobert made 92% of his shots at the rim. So the two have NEVER been asked to play the same role for any extended period of time, be it offense OR defense, hence, two different players.

And yes, Gobert is very good at what he does, but his limitations are different than Len's are--doesn't make one better or worse, just different. Gobert's a better defender, Len's a better offense threat. My point was Len is no slouch defensively, but no, he's not as good as Gobert is around the rim, so maybe 'comparable' wasn't the best choice of words, since Gobert is one of the best at what he does, but Len can be, and has shown to be, a very good defender as well.

[bwgood77]

No, I don't, actually. I honestly have no idea how these guys will turn out. My point is you are speculating about things you can't possibly know. Like I said. Did you think IT was going to be an All-Star?? Was he a "3rd or 4th option" on a contender?? He was, at the lowest, the 2nd option on a contender.

Then you compare Booker to a 7-time All-Star, yet then say he won't be anything more than a "3rd or 4th option" on a contender. Hate to break it to you, but Joe Johnson was a lot more than an 'adequate starter'. But hey, if you want to call Booker an 'adequate starter' on his way to 7 All-Star games, then by all means, call him that. I'd be perfectly fine with Booker having a career like Johnson. Maybe you just don't know what 'adequate' means, or the difference between 1st/2nd vs 3rd/4th. IDK, but I DO know Johnson was a lot more than that.

But please, do tell, what makes a young NBA player 'adequate' vs having 'a lot of upside'?? Which Drafted prospects from this draft have 'a lot of upside', and why don't Bender or Chriss have it? What metrics are you using to make this determination?? What about Booker's game do you not like that makes you think he'll only be 'adequate'?? How about Warren?? Basically, what's the difference between a young NBA player with 'a lot of upside' vs one without 'a lot of upside'?? And what credentials do you have to make that determinationBoth Amare ??

Like I said. Please, post what you did about Booker on the General Board and see what kind of response you get.

Sorry, BW, did that cross some imaginary acceptable post word limit?? If there is one, I'm not aware of it.

Remind me again what contending team Joe Johnson was ever more than a 3rd/4th option for.

'04-'05 Suns--2nd or 3rd option, but as he shot 48% from 3, I think that's a fair assessment.

'08-'09 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for a 47-35 team.

'09-'10 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for 53-29 team.

'10-'11 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for 44-38 team.

'13-'14 Nets--Def 1st/2nd Option for 44-38 team.

All three of those ATL teams won a playoff series, and he scored more than anyone else on those teams. As did the Nets.

Next question?? Or are you going to answer any of mine, since I did the courtesy of answering yours.

Both Amare and Marion scored more in 2004-5 and I don't know that I'd call him an option ahead of Nash either.

Don't get me wrong though, I'll be happy if he ends up as good as Joe Johnson but I think he could easily be better. Also if JJ was playing with Duncan, KG, LeBron I think he could have easily been a second option. T-Wolves had the best record in the league in 2003-4 and I think he was better than Sprewell or Cassell.

[bwgood77]

Booker is obviously the second coming of Ray Allen, he just needs do some BoingVert

Could be. That remains to be seen. Better all around maybe. Ray was never really more than a third option on a contender eithe. Maybe the Bucks if you think they were a contender.

[NavLDO]

Remind me again what contending team Joe Johnson was ever more than a 3rd/4th option for.

'04-'05 Suns--2nd or 3rd option, but as he shot 48% from 3, I think that's a fair assessment.

'08-'09 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for a 47-35 team.

'09-'10 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for 53-29 team.

'10-'11 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for 44-38 team.

'13-'14 Nets--Def 1st/2nd Option for 44-38 team.

All three of those ATL teams won a playoff series, and he scored more than anyone else on those teams. As did the Nets.

Next question?? Or are you going to answer any of mine, since I did the courtesy of answering yours.

Both Amare and Marion scored more in 2004-5 and I don't know that I'd call him an option ahead of Nash either.

Don't get me wrong though, I'll be happy if he ends up as good as Joe Johnson but I think he could easily be better. Also if JJ was playing with Duncan, KG, LeBron I think he could have easily been a second option. T-Wolves had the best record in the league in 2003-4 and I think he was better than Sprewell or Cassell.

Johnson hit 48% from 3 that year. Of course he wasn't an option down low, where the majority of the points scored were, but he was 3rd in pts by, what...a point? Maybe a point and a half?? So, what's the definition of 'an option'...sorry, BW, but his posts are littered with 'inconsistencies' and 'moving of goal posts', and has YET to provide ANY evidence supporting his opinion for our players.

[bwgood77]

Johnson hit 48% from 3 that year. Of course he wasn't an option down low, where the majority of the points scored were, but he was 3rd in pts by, what...a point? Maybe a point and a half?? So, what's the definition of 'an option'...sorry, BW, but his posts are littered with 'inconsistencies' and 'moving of goal posts', and has YET to provide ANY evidence supporting his opinion for our players.

He may not want to have a days on end debate with you which I understand. I don't know what kind of evidence you are looking for.

[Joe Pong]

'04-'05 Suns--2nd or 3rd option, but as he shot 48% from 3, I think that's a fair assessment.

'08-'09 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for a 47-35 team.

'09-'10 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for 53-29 team.

'10-'11 Hawks--Def 1st/2nd Option for 44-38 team.

'13-'14 Nets--Def 1st/2nd Option for 44-38 team.

All three of those ATL teams won a playoff series, and he scored more than anyone else on those teams. As did the Nets.

Next question?? Or are you going to answer any of mine, since I did the courtesy of answering yours.

Both Amare and Marion scored more in 2004-5 and I don't know that I'd call him an option ahead of Nash either.

Don't get me wrong though, I'll be happy if he ends up as good as Joe Johnson but I think he could easily be better. Also if JJ was playing with Duncan, KG, LeBron I think he could have easily been a second option. T-Wolves had the best record in the league in 2003-4 and I think he was better than Sprewell or Cassell.

Johnson hit 48% from 3 that year. Of course he wasn't an option down low, where the majority of the points scored were, but he was 3rd in pts by, what...a point? Maybe a point and a half?? So, what's the definition of 'an option'...sorry, BW, but his posts are littered with 'inconsistencies' and 'moving of goal posts', and has YET to provide ANY evidence supporting his opinion for our players.

Of course everything I post is my opinion. Just like everything you post is your opinion.

And my opinion is that this roster is full of guys who may develop into decent complementary players, but not much more. Nothing wrong with that, but eventually you need to find a way to add some real impact guys.

You may want to argue about Booker. I've said before I think best case scenario he ends up like Joe Johnson caliber player. Again, a good complementary piece. But no team was ever going to compete for a championship if Joe Johnson was their best player.

Booker can be a piece of a good team, but he'll need guys like an Amare, Marion, or Nash around him. This roster has nobody who I envision developing into players of that caliber. Feel free to disagree.

[Joe Pong]

Johnson hit 48% from 3 that year. Of course he wasn't an option down low, where the majority of the points scored were, but he was 3rd in pts by, what...a point? Maybe a point and a half?? So, what's the definition of 'an option'...sorry, BW, but his posts are littered with 'inconsistencies' and 'moving of goal posts', and has YET to provide ANY evidence supporting his opinion for our players.

He may not want to have a days on end debate with you which I understand. I don't know what kind of evidence you are looking for.

Pretty much.

[bwgood77]

Calling Booker a 4th option on a championship team is trolling. Theres no **** way around that one. Youre over moderating here dude. That is 100% troll bait.

The only moderating I did (and this was yesterday) was after a post in which someone said he thought a poster was overrating our players, simply disagreeing with a post, then the poster immediately resorted to calling the poster a troll in a post littered with emoticons. Other than that, I don't agree with the guy on his opinions. I don't agree with many people's opinions at times, but I don't call them a troll and do this:

I think some people overvalue some of our players at times.

The definition of a troll in the rules here is "Users who post with the sole intention of starting up trouble" and I simply don't think he did that, and I still don't.

This is a free and open forum and people can post whatever their opinion is.

[sunsbum]

Johnson hit 48% from 3 that year. Of course he wasn't an option down low, where the majority of the points scored were, but he was 3rd in pts by, what...a point? Maybe a point and a half?? So, what's the definition of 'an option'...sorry, BW, but his posts are littered with 'inconsistencies' and 'moving of goal posts', and has YET to provide ANY evidence supporting his opinion for our players.

He may not want to have a days on end debate with you which I understand. I don't know what kind of evidence you are looking for.

I guess im old school, i figure when i put something on a forum for other people to disect i should probably be ready to back up my thought process on the subject at hand. P.S. no one is calling booker ray allen, saint. Id say more like a super ray allen.

[saintEscaton]

JJ was at his best as a complimentary off the ball player who could handle the rock and run the secondary PnR in a pinch, cold blooded assasin in crunchtime who could post up mismatches but got too ISO happy. He peaked as maybe a Top 20 player, the 5th best SG behind Kobe,DWade, Roy/TMac. As a high volume #1 option he only surpassed a 110 ORTG once (09-10) and averaged a pedestrian 53.9% TS his 7 seasons with the Hawks. Nothing close to a franchise caliber

[sunsbum]

Calling Booker a 4th option on a championship team is trolling. Theres no **** way around that one. Youre over moderating here dude. That is 100% troll bait.

The only moderating I did (and this was yesterday) was after a post in which someone said he thought a poster was overrating our players, simply disagreeing with a post, then the poster immediately resorted to calling the poster a troll in a post littered with emoticons. Other than that, I don't agree with the guy on his opinions. I don't agree with many people's opinions at times, but I don't call them a troll and do this:

I think some people to overvalue some of our players at times.

The definition of a troll in the rules here is "Users who post with the sole intention of starting up trouble" and I simply don't think he did that, and I still don't.

This is a free and open forum and people can post whatever their opinion is.

I called him a troll with no smiley faces and you deleted my post. But whatever, if booker is 4th best player on a championship team that means pongtroll has a crystal ball and A.) we win a championship with booker! And B.) we end up having 3 other players that are better than booker on said championship team. Who else is excited?!

[MrMiyagi]

Best Homer ?

take your pick. You guys just have such a hard time with alternative views, especially if the 'pessimism meter' is equal to your 'optimism meter'. Then its a full on dog pile, biting, scratching, and kicking optional. Troll ? really ? Hardly. So what am I then ? A cranky old guy who sits on a porch rather than under a bridge ? hahaha

I hope these kids pan out eventually... and sooner than later. What I find disturbing is the lackluster attempt to better this team via free agency or trade. I do hold confidence in McMully's penchant for roster shuffling and am conceding the route of a patient approach to get through this wacky spending spree. But you don't build half a team then quit by touting the future. We have a good core and some possible stars in the making... However, the sun is setting on Bleds time here, has all but set on Chandler, Tucker, Duds, and Barbs.... it just seems like more should/could be done for this season. And yeah, that would mean signing some old guy who can actually play PF, or trading for a up and comer. (see, even I have hope, though it might not fit into the youther agenda)

(go easy on this one Nav... you have already bombed away your load for the weekend)

Didn't you lambast McDonough for shuffling the roster too much? Now you want him to move more guys?

How is the "sun setting" on players who have signed multi-year contracts with us? Nobody on our roster was drafted in the 90's like some of the guys who are retiring right now - Chandler is the closest in 2001, but he still wants to play ball. He seems like the only guy who might not want to be here. Sure as the season progresses we might here some rumblings, but overall we're in a position to make a move and we have a bunch of young talent that we don't have to feel we're "stuck on the treadmill" and make a panic trade.

I don't see where the "half a team" comment comes from. We are nearly at capacity for our roster, we've got a good mix of young and old and we've got a legitimate 9 man rotation of guys with NBA experience (Bled, Knight, PJ, Dudley, Chandler, Booker, TJ, Len, Barbosa) and we've got 3 rookies who could make cases for their involvement (Ulis especially this season) and Archie who'll be as hungry as ever knowing that this his last contracted year.

[sunsbum]

Both Amare and Marion scored more in 2004-5 and I don't know that I'd call him an option ahead of Nash either.

Don't get me wrong though, I'll be happy if he ends up as good as Joe Johnson but I think he could easily be better. Also if JJ was playing with Duncan, KG, LeBron I think he could have easily been a second option. T-Wolves had the best record in the league in 2003-4 and I think he was better than Sprewell or Cassell.

Johnson hit 48% from 3 that year. Of course he wasn't an option down low, where the majority of the points scored were, but he was 3rd in pts by, what...a point? Maybe a point and a half?? So, what's the definition of 'an option'...sorry, BW, but his posts are littered with 'inconsistencies' and 'moving of goal posts', and has YET to provide ANY evidence supporting his opinion for our players.

Of course everything I post is my opinion. Just like everything you post is your opinion.

And my opinion is that this roster is full of guys who may develop into decent complementary players, but not much more. Nothing wrong with that, but eventually you need to find a way to add some real impact guys.

You may want to argue about Booker. I've said before I think best case scenario he ends up like Joe Johnson caliber player. Again, a good complementary piece. But no team was ever going to compete for a championship if Joe Johnson was their best player.

Booker can be a piece of a good team, but he'll need guys like an Amare, Marion, or Nash around him. This roster has nobody who I envision developing into players of that caliber. Feel free to disagree.

I think everyone around here is well aware booker is probably a tier 2 star. No one on this board is kicking back saying "rebuild complete" because of him. Hes excellarated the rebuild with how quickly hes refining his tools but yes, believe it or not most of us realize it takes more than one star to compete in the nba.

Do we have that 2nd star? Probably not yet. Do we have a foundation where adding that star can put us in a position to be a contender without losing all of our assets to get him? Yes.

[bwgood77]

Calling Booker a 4th option on a championship team is trolling. Theres no **** way around that one. Youre over moderating here dude. That is 100% troll bait.

The only moderating I did (and this was yesterday) was after a post in which someone said he thought a poster was overrating our players, simply disagreeing with a post, then the poster immediately resorted to calling the poster a troll in a post littered with emoticons. Other than that, I don't agree with the guy on his opinions. I don't agree with many people's opinions at times, but I don't call them a troll and do this:

I think some people to overvalue some of our players at times.

The definition of a troll in the rules here is "Users who post with the sole intention of starting up trouble" and I simply don't think he did that, and I still don't.

This is a free and open forum and people can post whatever their opinion is.

I called him a troll with no smiley faces and you deleted my post. But whatever, if booker is 4th best player on a championship team that means pongtroll has a crystal ball and A.) we win a championship with booker! And B.) we end up having 3 other players that are better than booker on said championship team. Who else is excited?!

I didn't really want you to egg on someone who gets overly fired up at times. I have high hopes for Booker, and I'm not going to cap his ceiling. I do know that with Barkley, KJ, and a bunch of great players we couldn't win the championship and could only even get there once. The SSOL Suns couldn't even make the finals. Do I think he will be better than Barkley, KJ, Nash, and prime Amare? I hope so.

There are not that many championship teams without multiple superstars. I think he can get there, but I won't say anything is a given.

I will say with the way the league is going, shooting is a necessary trait to have, and I have a feeling he will be among the best at that.

[sunsbum]

I was calling pong the troll, not jmac or whoever.

[NavLDO]

Johnson hit 48% from 3 that year. Of course he wasn't an option down low, where the majority of the points scored were, but he was 3rd in pts by, what...a point? Maybe a point and a half?? So, what's the definition of 'an option'...sorry, BW, but his posts are littered with 'inconsistencies' and 'moving of goal posts', and has YET to provide ANY evidence supporting his opinion for our players.

He may not want to have a days on end debate with you which I understand. I don't know what kind of evidence you are looking for.

I made it easy for him. In two separate posts...the 1st:

But please, do tell, what makes a young NBA player 'adequate' vs having 'a lot of upside'?? Which Drafted prospects from this draft have 'a lot of upside', and why don't Bender or Chriss have it? What metrics are you using to make this determination?? What about Booker's game do you not like that makes you think he'll only be 'adequate'?? How about Warren?? Basically, what's the difference between a young NBA player with 'a lot of upside' vs one without 'a lot of upside'?? And what credentials do you have to make that determination??

and...

Something along the lines of "well Booker tends to [insert trait here],and if he doesn't fix that, he'll never progress" or "Warren is very weak defensively because he doesn't [insert reason here], and if he doesn't fix that, he'll be nothing more than..."

But no, all he comes back with is:

"Remind me again what contending team Joe Johnson was ever more than a 3rd/4th option for."

Great explanation! Way to defend that opinion...

It's obvious I've crossed a line in your opinion, so I'll just let it drop, but I don't think I've been too over the top, and have provided evidence to support my assertions. It's not worth my time arguing the point anymore, he's obviously just going to keep half answering and squirming his way throughout this whole point.

[bwgood77]

I wouldn't say you've crossed the line, but I think you might be wasting your time. It's just someone's opinion and to proclaim anything either way after a rookie season is a bit premature. Personally I think he can be a great player in the league. I don't have much evidence other than watching him and his instincts at such a young age, the company he has put himself in scoring wise by that age, and what some of the best 2 guards have said about him (Kobe, Wade, Butler, etc) as well as much of the media.